To return from any entry to the top of this page, click any date on the left
To place a bookmark/anchor in the URL bar (for links), click the blog title
To read blogs from other years and months use the menu above
To change the text size click ‘AAA’ or Mobile icon on the menu above
To permanently change the text size click ‘Configure’ on the menu above
My response to Will Tuckley’s letter
has been on his desk since lunchtime and the people (two actually) who found
it on line before this late evening blog seem to think I have let him off
lightly. That is to misunderstand the strategy. No one I know of writes to
Bexley council expecting to get an honest answer. The name of the game is to
block as many escape routes as possible and see which way they jump. It doesn’t
really matter what they do, invent another lie or say nothing. The lack of truth
always presents a new opportunity to cause Bexley council maximum embarrassment.
The primary purpose of today’s email is to make it that bit more difficult for the Local Government Ombudsman, the Information Commissioner and the police to back Bexley council as will be their natural inclination. The delays those bodies regard as the norm should allow this business to be dragged out until next year’s elections, it won’t be difficult, Bexley’s obscene blog, traced to councillor Peter Craske’s phone line, is still bobbing along nicely, the Independent Police Complaints Commission wrote to me again about that only this week.
If Tuckley is worried about wasting public money on complaint handling he should give a thought as to what his failure to ‘shop’ Craske has cost the taxpayer. From what little I know it must have crashed the £50,000 barrier by now. Far from ‘shopping him’ Tuckley poked his nose in with the Crown Prosecution Service. As the Detective Sergeant said, Regina v Craske was crippled by political interference. I blame Teresa O’Neill.
Tuckley, I accept, has been dealt a very poor hand. A whole host of lies by councillor Cheryl Bacon compounded by Mrs. Lynn Tyler’s failure to spot the inconsistencies in the witnesses’ statements distributed under FOI has not made his job any easier. The fact that half the statements were disowned by their authors is just the icing on the cake.
Uncle Will’s ‘catch all’ that anyone who knows someone who falls foul of council rules is equally guilty is both sinister, pathetic and genius all at the same time. That perverse ruling surely indicates Tuckley knows the truth but with the supreme leader controlling his quarter million pound purse strings a change of direction is impossible. No one is free of O’Neill’s evil influence. One councillor wrote of being burned alive if the boss discovered our correspondence. Make no mistake, while Teresa O’Neill runs Bexley council, it’s core will always be rotten.